The 2014 Joe Carter-Tony Batista Award
The days of having to rail against runs batted in as a particularly useful indicator of individual offensive value are long behind us. That does not mean there might not be potentially interesting research to do on situational hitting or the like, but simply that the straight-up use of RBI is not something that really needs to be debated.
Nonetheless, it is still interesting to see what sorts of hitters can accumulate high numbers of RBI, something we recognize with an award named for two players who managed big RBI numbers despite less than impressive advanced hitting metrics: the John Carter-Tony Bautista Award.
I started handing out the John Carter-Tony Bautista Award back in 2009, and it has been an annual rite of fall (2010, 2011, 2012, 2013). One can go back and read earlier iterations for longer explanations. The short description is that is measures how much a hitter’s number of RBI might exaggerate (or understate) his individual offensive performance. It does so by simply dividing the player’s number of RBI by his absolute linear weights runs created (wRC). Not all the contenders are necessarily bad hitters, as will be seen. I set minimums of 500 plate appearances as well as 90 RBI so we do not simply get a bunch of leadoff hitters. With the deflating run-scoring environment, I have wondered whether I should lower the minimum RBI threshold. I left it at 90, but it is something to think about for next year.
Without any further ado, here are your four runners up and your 2014 Joe Carter–Tony Batista Award winner.
5. Ian Desmond, 1.154 RBI/wRC, 108 wRC+, .255/.313/.430, 91 RBI
Even taking into account the increasingly tougher run environment, Desmond’s bat has been on the decline since 2012. His walk rate has increased, as it does for most hitters as they age, and he is not quite the free swinger he was back in 2012. however, Desmond’s rate of home runs on balls on contact has dropped since 2012. More significantly, in 2014 his contact rate (and thus strikeout rate) significantly worsened.
Despite those concerns, Desmond still has enough pop to make it count when he does make contact, enough to make him an above-average hitter, which is excellent for a shortstop. Desmond was not better with runners on (105 wRC+) or in scoring position (111 wRC+) than he was with the bases empty (111 wRC+). As one might guess, Desmond’s secret to maximizing his RBI production was where he hit in the order. Most of the year, Desmond his fifth or sixth. The Nationals’ most frequent third and fourth hitters were Jayson Werth (.394 OBP) and Adam LaRoche (.362 OBP).
Yeah, how Desmond got all those RBI is a real mystery. Alert Veronica Mars.
4. Albert Pujols, 1.156 RBI/wRC, 124 wRC+, .272/.324/.466, 105 RBI
Is a 124 wRC+ supposed to be better or worse than (subjective) expectations for Albert Pujols at this point? If we were talking about a player with a different history or contract, no one would really bat an eye. He would just be a first baseman in his mid-thirties who does not walk much any more, but gets the bat on the ball and hits for decent power (for these days) while fighting an increasingly brutal BABIP. A 124 wRC+ from a first baseman may not grab your attention, but it is definitely more than just adequate.
Like Desmond, Pujols did not get his RBI numbers by hitting better with runners on (122 wRC+) or in scoring position (99 wRC+). He was at his best with the bases empty (125 wRC+) this year. Pujols hit third all season for the Angels. The Angels’ most frequent leadoff hitter, Kole Calhoun, was not exactly an on-base machine, even if these days a .325 OBP is above average. But there was this one guy who hit right in front of Pujols just about all season. He had a down year for him with just a .377 OBP. Maybe you’ve heard of him.
3. Evan Longoria, 1.160 RBI/wRC, 107 wRC+, .253/.320/.404, 91 RBI
When Longoria was #4 on this list back in 2011, he was coming off a season during which he played in just 133 games, had only a .239 BABIP, and still finished with 136 wRC+ and 6.2 WAR. In 2012, Longoria was better when he played, but played less than half of a season. In 2013 some of Longoria’s raw numbers took a slight hit, but his power and the increasingly stingy run environment (not to mention his defensive skill) meant that it was still a typically great Longoria season.
In 2014, Longoria played in 162 games for the first time in his career and logged a career-high 700 plate appearances. That would generally be good news, but at the plate, Longoria had the worst season of his career. A 107 wRC+ from a third baseman is quite good, even if one thinks Longoria’s defense has taken a hit. But the lower walk and home run rates have to be a bit scary for the Rays given their investment in Longoria.
Longoria spent most of his time in the cleanup spot this season. He also hit third for about 50 games. The Rays’ most frequent leadoff hitter this year was Desmond Jennings, who does a number of things well, but is not the reincarnation of Rickey Henderson when it comes to getting on base. The Rays’ most frequent number two hitter (who sometimes hit leadoff, as well), was good old Ben Zobrist, who got on base at a decent .354 clip. When Longoria hit fourth, it was often right behind Matt Joyce (.349 OBP).
While that was not a bad situation for accumulating RBI, it was not in the same league as Desmond’s or Pujols’. The difference: Longoria was not good with the bases empty this year (89 wRC+), but did well with runners on (128 wRC+) and in scoring position (112 wRC+). Yes, it is probably random variation.
2. Adrian Gonzalez, 1.262 RBI/wRC, 128 wRC+, .276/.335/.382, 116 RBI
Gonzalez had a nice season relative to his recent past this year. What makes it intriguing is not simply that Gonzale’ wRC+ was his best since 2011, but how he did it. Although he struck out a bit more this season, his walk rate increased a bit over the previous two. Even more encouraging was the uptick in power — his .206 ISO this year was partly based on an increase in his rate of doubles (which probably involves a fair bit of random variation), but his home run on contact rate, which is less subject to randomness, was his best since 2010. Hitting home runs is a good way to up RBI numbers, obviously.
The other way, as you have probably figured out by now, it is to hit in the middle of the batting order — third for fourth is nice, as it gives a frequent number of plate appearances while also (hopefully) doing so with runners on base more frequently. Gonzalez mostly split his time between third and fourth for the Dodgers this season. L.A.’s primary leadoff man, Dee Gordon, was only okay at getting on base this season (.326), but their number two hitter (and sometimes number three when Gonzalez hit fourth), the Yasiel Puig (why doesn’t he get more press?) had a .382 OBP this year. Hanley Ramirez (.369 OBP) also spent a number of games time hitting third in front of Gonzalez.
Not only did Gonzalez have one or two high-OBP hitters in front of him, but he also hit much better with runners on base (148 wRC+) or in scoring position (157 wRC+) than with the bases empty (108 wRC+). Hitting well behind high-OBP hitters, especially when they are on base is a pretty good formula for winning this award. But, of course, it is not alway the best formula.
1. Ryan Howard, 1.406 RBI/wRC, 93 wRC+, .223/.310/.380, 95 RBI
Ryan Howard did not have 500 or more plate appearances in either 2012 or 2013. The last time he did, in 2011, he won. Back then, Howard had a 124 wRC+ and The Contract had not yet even begun. All the jokes have already been made. Needless to say, things have gotten much, much worse. However, we should note that Howard hit much better with runners on this year. And, as in the past, hitting cleanup behind Chase Utley always helps.
The run environment is changing, but still, as as always, a slugger in the right place with hits at the right time can accumulate RBI numbers that exaggerate his individual offensive value.
Just for fun, and to make the point again, here are 2014’s five “worst” hitters with at least 500 plate appearances and 90 RBI by RBI/wRC:
Giancarlo Stanton, .920 RBI/wRC, 159 wRC+, .288/.395/.555, 105 RBI
Mike Trout, .883 RBI/wRC, 167 wRC+, .287/.377/.561, 111 RBI
Victor Martinez, .867 RBI/wRC, 166 wRC+, .335/.409/.565, 103 RBI
Jose Bautista, .860 RBI/wRC, 159 wRC+, .286/.403/.524, 103 RBI
Michael Brantley, .855 RBI/wRC, 155 wRC+, .327/.385/.506, 97 RBI
Matt Klaassen reads and writes obituaries in the Greater Toronto Area. If you can't get enough of him, follow him on Twitter.
John carter
Excellent clarinetist.
John Carter, minor leaguer topping out in Triple-A Calgary in 1997 seems an odd person to name an award after: http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=carter001joh
Unless he meant John Carter, the movie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_(film)
… man from Mars …
The Joe/JohnCarter-TonyBatista/Bautista* Award is the latest evidence of a virulent strain of honorifics ebola infecting the FanGraphs writers stable, currently exsanguinating awards and trophies like Vlad the Impaler victims on blood thinners.
* Could also be Joe-John Batbautista, what you’d get from the love child of a bald English yob centerback and an Argentinian striker with a teen rocker do.
Fangraphs – where you can laugh your head off – for peanuts.
Aww geez Homer, that is just the worst fake name I’ve ever heard. Just terrible.
Interesting that Brantley tops the worst list considering that he has historically hit better with RISP than without. I hope you do an anti-Joe Carter/Tony Bautista award write up
Isn’t that what the final list in the piece IS?
I don’t see any details about why they were the worst, so, no.
I’ll go out on a limb and say it’s the opposite of the reasons that the other five guys were the “best” – they had guys with poor OBP hitting in front of them. Martinez had the luxury of batting behind a high-OBP guy who himself drove in many runners that might have otherwise been on base for Martinez, but also moves so poorly while on base that he is tough for Martinez to drive in.
Meanwhile, they all hit so well themselves that they inflated the denominator in the (RBI/wRC) formula.
Brantley’s low RBI total can be blamed on Francona hitting Michael Bourn and Kipnis in front of him for most of the year. And Jose Ramirez, Mike Aviles are also not on-base machines.
Congratulations Ryan! Much deserved! Much deserved….
(sobs openly)
I’m just as moved as you are, Phillies113.
Of course, it helps Ryan to keep winning these awards when he has a proven .300 hitter in front of him like Ben Revere. I’m hoping Ben gets himself some awards too as we take the Phillies to the next level.
Dunno about the ‘next level’: got a feeling Philly’ll be under the Curse of Captain Underpants for decades to come.
Hey, leave me out of this! That double-tapered incident only happened one time!
I asked this question in the comments of Matt K’s last article, but I feel compelled to ask it again: why do I get the impression that Matt’s articles are the only one’s that don’t go through some sort of editorial process before being published? There have been multiple grammatical/spelling errors in every article he has published recently.
To be fair, I understand that this is a free website, so I’m not demanding any changes or anything. I’m just curious as to why these are the only articles on FG that don’t seem to get any proofreading.
Sure, Matt’s pieces get proof-read … by US!
And once crowd-source proof-read here on this planet, it’s put at the feet of John Carter-Batistuta, intergalactic Martian hunter and soccer god, who boots that baby clear to Andromeda!
The only “one’s” that go through an editing process?
BerryliumBe4, I now appoint you the Chief Auditor of the Grammar Police! JWE is on paid leave pending an investigation.
I am also conferring on you this trophy from my collection:
“Grammar Rodeo – Head Buckaroo”
One thing I notice in Jeff Sullivan’s pieces is how he throws ‘s all over the place. His usage of all the ‘s isn’t incorrect per se, but the style of it is a little weird. Here’s a made-up example: “Rusney Castillo’s going to be fast. The offseason’s been exciting.”
For what it’s worth, I think he’s an excellent writer and I enjoy reading his pieces greatly.
That’s a point about Sullivan’s pieces that’s not been made yet, in this guy’s recollection which’s not perfect.
Castles made of sand
sand which’s made of quartz
S’uffering s’ccotash, how can you even s’tand it!
Thank you. I was going to do this also.
It looks like you are dividing wRC+ by RBI, not RBI by wRC+. As in Desmond’s score is greater than his wRC because he has less than 100 RBI, etc.
Gonzalez had a .482 SLG not .382
Ryan Howard seems like the quintessential modern Joe Carter-Tony Batista award player.
I had 95 RBI’s!
That’s worth something, right?
Well, I mean, it DID get ya an award…
Ryan Howard is a spokesman for Subway, and his favorite is the double steak-and-cheese. There’s gotta be a metaphor for his RBI total in there somewhere.
And I think the following players are also worth mentioning for surpassing 1.300 RBI/wRC, though they did it with fewer than 90 RBIs: Jay Bruce, Brian McCann, Dominic Brown, and and Matt Dominguez.
I never knew you were a baseball fan.
“as always, a slugger in the right place with hits at the right time can accumulate RBI numbers that exaggerate his individual offensive value.”
This sentence is exactly wrong. Hits that actually produce runs do not exaggerate offensive value. That is real value, even if that value cannot be entirely attributed to the hitter. Hitters that get meaningless hits that produce no actual runs have exaggerated value. This should be obvious, but it gets lost in the rush to vilify context-dependent traditional stats.
His sentence is almost entirely correct. I think the only word I would change would be “value” to “skill”. You are right that hits that drive in runs are valuable. However, RBI have historically been used to evaluate a player’s skill. The point is that many other hitters could have gotten just as many RBI had they hit in that place in the order or been more fortunate in the timing of their hits.
I think the author’s argument would be that observers have historically said hitters with high RBI deliver a lot of value to their team. However, many other players could have delivered that same “value” had they been given the same opportunities. Hence evaluating a player based on his RBI total can exaggerate a player’s value to a team.
To say he is exactly wrong implies that the whole concept behind his sentence is incorrect. I do not think that is the case here.
Skill and value should not be conflated. They are different things.
I knew I’d see Agon on this list.
2. Adrian Gonzalez, 1.262 RBI/wRC, 128 wRC+, .276/.335/.382, 116 RBI
I believe his slugging is .482, looks like a small typo there.
The thing about Agon is that he ended up with a good season, but he had SUCH a streaky season. His first third and last third were excellent, and the middle third was just awful.
100 years ago, Indianapolis Hoosiers slugger Frank LaPorte led all of baseball with 107 RBI, while hitting only 4 homers (not to mention wRC+ of only 117). He had 7 more RBI than Gravvy Cravath, who had a whopping 19 homers (which approached Ned Williamson’s 1884 record 27 HR). How did LaPorte accomplish this stunning Carter-Batista-Bluejayesque display of batting prowess? He hit behind the man that had the best forgotten rookie season of all time, Benny Kauff. Kauff had a wOBA of .465 with 8 homers, 120 runs, 95 RBI, 75 SB, adding up to 9.9 WAR. He was on base a lot, and he scored a lot when LaPorte put the ball in play.
Why hasn’t someone come up with a stat like “percentage of runners driven in” or something like that to evaluate run producers? I don’t care what a batter’s average is with runners in scoring position, it’s not particularly useful. Just tell me what percentage of baserunners he’s driven in. That would be far more interesting. Also, if someone already has come up with this stat, please direct me to it, and thank you.